The newspaper reported
there was violence at Malkerns Industrial School on 18 June 2013, when one of
the boys fought and stabbed another offender with a sharpened toothbrush.

The newspaper reported,
‘The aggressor was instantly beaten without a hearing and all boys known to be
his friends were handcuffed and beaten in the still of the night.’

It added, ‘The
next morning all teachers were ordered to conduct a strip search, apparently an
order coming from the commissioner himself who is alleged to have said ‘uma
kufanele, isende lomntwana alibanjwe’ (squeeze their testicles).’

The Observer said the investigation reported
there was sporadic use of force at the juvenile industrial school dormitories, ‘which
is protected by the head-teacher and remains unreported mainly because the
administration also participates in the violence’.

The Observer reported that
female correction officers, ‘inserted their fingers into the girls’ private parts using one glove on
all the students, exposing them to risks of contracting infectious diseases’.

The newspaper
also reported that one child, ‘was beaten such that he urinated and was later
forced to drink his urine.

‘“I drank it
because of the beatings I received,” the boy reportedly said.

Another child
said, ‘My hands and testicles were pressed by the officers who were wearing
their boots I thought they were killing me. My only sin was that they found
tattoos on my body.’

The Observer reported another child said, ‘I
was bleeding from the ears after I was kicked all over the body by the officers.’

This is not the
first time violent behaviour by warders has hit the headlines. In 2013 it was
reported that children at the industrial school were systematically
assaulted for more than five hours by warders.

Some of the children were forced to strip naked for
beatings by the officers who used belts, sneakers, open hands and feet to
assault them all over their bodies.

TheSwazi News newspaper reported at the time that 15 officers were
involved and more than two thirds of the 430 pupils at the school were
assaulted from 8.30 am until after 2.00 pm, during one day.

One child interviewed by the newspaper said, ‘They were
using belts, open hands and an All-Star (sneaker). We were ordered to strip
naked before being assaulted all over the body, indiscriminately.’

The attack was also described by another as being worse than police torture
known as ‘lishubhu’.

Another said, ‘Besi bulawa (we were being murdered).’

When asked why they were assaulted, one pupil responded,
‘Watsi lomunye thishela basi faka luvalo (one of the teachers told us that they
were instilling fear).’

The pupils said they did not report the matter to the police because they
feared being victimised.

A Swaziland newspaper has reported criticisms of the competence of a
judge at a time when one editor and a writer are in jail awaiting contempt of
court charges for criticising
the kingdom’s judiciary.

The Sunday Observer reported criticisms
that Mpendulo Simelane, aged 39, who was appointed to the High Court bench in
February 2014, was not properly qualified to be a High Court judge.

The Observer is in effect
owned by King Mswati III who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last
absolute monarch. The King chooses the judges in his kingdom and the article
could be seen as an indirect criticism of the King’s decision.

Welcome Dlamini wrote in the Observer under the headline Mpendulo
Simelane: Is he fit to Judge? ‘However, his [Simelane’s] appointment
has been met with a lot of misgivings by the legal fraternity which feels he is
not yet ripe for the position. The Sunday
Observer has it in authority that even some of the judges are not happy
with Mpendulo Simelane being appointed to be part of them.’

He added, ‘An impeccable source within the judiciary said it was well
known that Simelane’s appointment had not gone down well with his colleagues
even though there was nothing they could do about it.

‘“Some of the judges feel he does not yet qualify to be a judge. As a
judge, you have to write judgments that will stand their ground throughout the
world. Judgments are important because they become a point of reference for
other countries. Is Simelane fit to write such judgments? Some of the judges
don’t think so,” said the source.’

‘Further, said the source: “The judges would have preferred that the
post should have been advertised because there are a lot of lawyers and
magistrates who are senior and have the necessary qualifications to be
appointed judges. With Simelane, he did not compete with anyone for the
position. It was sort of a reward.”

‘Constitutionally, a person has to meet one of three requirements in
order to be appointed judge of the kingdom’s High Court. That person should
either have been “a legal practitioner, barrister or advocate of not less than
ten years practice in Swaziland or any part of the Commonwealth or the Republic
of Ireland”.

‘Or, that person should have served as “a judge of a superior court of
unlimited jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters in any part of the
Commonwealth or the Republic of Ireland for a period of not less than five
years”.

‘Alternatively, that individual should have either been a legal
practitioner, barrister or advocate and a judge of a superior court as stated
above for a combined period of such practice and service of not less than ten
years.

‘Judge Mpendulo Simelane, according to another source within the legal
fraternity, does not meet any of these requirements.

‘“Yes, he was admitted as an attorney 10 years ago but he served for
only five years before he was appointed registrar of the High Court and that
position cannot be classified as being a legal practitioner,” said the source.’

The publication by the Observer of direct questions about the competence of a judge comes
two weeks after Bheki Makhubu, the editor of the Nation magazine and human rights lawyer Thulani Maseko were arrested and
charged with writing and publishing articles critical of
Swaziland Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi.

Earlier this year, the Sunday Observer was forced to publish an abject apology after it
published a criticism of the judiciary. In its apology the newspaper said.
‘[It] is not the intention of the Swazi
Observer and its newspapers to disregard the independence of the judiciary,
but to be seen to assisting it uphold the rule of law in the country’.

Friday, 28 March 2014

In
Swaziland a magazine editor and a human rights lawyer are sitting in jail
awaiting trial on ‘contempt of court’ charges. The ‘crime’ of Bheki Makhubu and
Thulani Maseko, was to write and publish articles in the Nation magazine critical of the Swazi judiciary. The full force of
the state was unleashed on them and they now await trial.

The
jailings were meant to intimidate journalists and other critics of the non-democratic
kingdom of Swaziland, which is ruled by King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africa’s
last absolute monarch.

The
intimidation has worked and newspapers are censoring themselves and tempering
their criticism of the government, the judiciary and the King.

The Times Sunday, a member of the only independent
newspaper group in Swaziland, has declined to publish an article this week (30
March 2014), written by its regular columnist Musa Hlophe on the subject.

Hlophe,
who is a leading human rights activist in Swaziland, wrote in his article, ‘On
trial now is no longer Thulani Maseko and Bheki Makhubu, for whatever they
might have been accused of, but on trial now is the country and its
institutions of power.’

Below
is the full article, published with Musa Hlophe’s permission.

What a Boomerang!

By Musa Hlophe

A fortnight ago, we woke up to headlines
that said Mr. Thulani R. Maseko, a prominent human rights lawyer in Swaziland,
had been arrested, and that the Nation's Managing Editor, Mr. Bheki Makhubu was
also wanted by the police. That was soon
to be followed with their appearance at the High Court, on allegations of
contempt of court.

At this point, no one expected what was to
follow. First, they were not brought beforean open court - hence we are not privileged to know what exactly happened, except to say that
we then heard that they had been remanded to prison for another week. Much as
this did raise questions, but we said to ourselves, this is Swaziland wherein
the rule of law and the respect, protection and promotion of human rights count
for nothing. Therefore accept this as it is:justice Swazi style.

But we were soon to be outraged by the
pictures of Bheki Makhubu going to court in leg-irons. What an insult to those
Swazis who cherish the ideal of the respect for human dignity? Section 18 of
our Constitution has this to say about protection from inhuman or degrading
treatment: (1) the dignity of every person is inviolable. (2) A person shall
not be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment".

This provision of our Constitution was
totally violated when Mr. Bheki Makhubu was brought to court, in a van, in
leg-irons. This was the most humiliating, degrading and embarrassing treatment
we, as a country, could subject a decent citizen to.The embarrassment did not reflect just on the
individual we thought we were humiliating, for whatever reason, but it
reflected how barbaric we can be as a nation. While it must be humiliating to
have two prominent law abiding citizens being incarcerated as the two have been,
to put them on leg irons as though they were not only dangerous, but violent
common criminals is totally inexcusable and insulting in the extreme.

Unfortunately, for the Government, which is
currently worried about its public image and the image of this country in
general, this particular case and the manner it is being handled: (as if to
instil fear in the lives of the citizens, as Senator Chief Kusa Dlamini
observed in parliament,) has renewed the calls for Swaziland to uphold the rule
of law and respect and protect human rights. What a Boomerang!On trial now, is no longer Thulani Maseko and
Bheki Makhubu, for whatever they might have been accused of, but on trial now is
the country and its institutions of power. As I have said in recent articles on this
subject of the country's image, it does not need any mischievous person or
persons to paint a bad picture about it, the Government and its structures are
good at doing that job. When power is abused by any structure of government,
the action reflects, not only on the Government of the day, but on all our
institutions of governance. What this reflects is an extreme form of assault
not on peoples, rights, but a serious assault on justice and the rule of law in
Swaziland. It is that bad!

So, when Mr. Percy Simelane says the King
never ordered the arrest of Bhantshana Gwebu, he misses the point that when the
State prefers charges against a citizen or citizens, it does so on behalf of
the Crown or the King. Therefore, when the charge is said to be The King vs,
Bhantshana Gwebu, it does not mean that the King has personally ordered the
trial of this citizen, but a certain arm of government has ordered the action.
But, above all, Mr. Simelane must know when to defend Government, even when
Government actions are indefensible! Sometimes it is advisable just to keep
quiet and let those departments or agencies of state which have blundered,
sweep their mess. It is called wisdom.

Now, how has this case boomeranged? In this
way: it has come about at a time when the Government is facing difficult
deadlines on both the issues of the ILO and the imminent cut off from being
entitled to low or no import taxes to our goods in the USA through AGOA/GSP.
Both these demands are about the promotion and protection of human rights
generally, but especially worker rights. The Americans have already expressed
their displeasure at how this case came about and how it is being handled. This
has a directimpact on whether we retain our privilege of AGOA/GSP
or lose it. We cannot, and must not hope to deceive the international community
by doing some patch work on worker rights, in total isolation of the broader
rights of citizens to freely express themselves, peacefully assemble and
associate, and hope that the international community will believe us. To think
so is utter foolishness.

The Prisons Department, by its action of
having these two decent citizens on leg irons, their denial of access to them
by their regional colleagues, has damaged the image of this country
irreparably. At the time of writing this article, I was aware of several high
level meetings of jurists in Pretoria, South Africa, to discuss this issue. I
was also informed by our colleagues in Brussels, that Trade Unions in Europe
were planning their own responses to this insult to human dignity.It has to be born in mind that the European
members of ITUC are very influential to their governments and EU Aid and Trade
Preferences are also subject to review if Swaziland openly and seriously abuses
human rights.If they were to take an
anti-Swaziland stance, we may face embarrassments in future; if not the same
pressure we are faced with, because of how the Unions in the United States of
America have done with regards to the AGOA/GSP. We must just wait and see.

But why are we finding ourselves in this
mess? Who is responsible for all this? Others will say that it has to do with
challenges in the exercise of power by some agents of state. Others will be
tempted to blame it on some foreigner or such kind. As you would probably know
me by now, I am neither racist nor tribalist! I am, if anything, a
pan-Africanist. Therefore I shall never criticize someone on the basis of
his/her country of origin.

In the present case, the problem we see is
simply a symptom of a much larger political problem. We, as a country, have
allowed ourselves to act above the law, with no consequences. The initiator of
this scandalous case will not be questioned as to his/her wisdom for doing this
thing the way it has been done: bringing shame to the country and its respected
institutions. It is because of such bad, if not poor political culture, which
has created a culture of impunity and unaccountability by agents of state.

Instead of those in power focussing on
those whose actions have brought this shame and embarrassment to the country,
sadly, they will be looking for some scapegoats to hang.

What we have seen these past two weeks
should embarrass every decent person who knows both Makhubu and Maseko: two
decent citizens of this country, and who, by their calling, have demonstrated
their love for King and country; will say the government stooped too low in its
handling of this case. While I am the first one to say the courts deserve
respect from the population. I am also the first one to say, that the courts
must earn the trust and respect from the citizenry. Respect and trust are never
imposed but earned. The Honourable Minister of Justice needs to know this.

However,
the most astonishing thing in all this is the silence from the Human Rights Commission!
Where are you throughout this episode? You mean to tell the nation that this
has not come to your attention and caused you worry? Which rights will you ever
protect? Do not bother trying to answer: we understand your limitations and
they are deliberate.

Our
sympathy goes to the families and friends of both Makhubu and Maseko. Your
loved ones may be incarcerated, but may you find comfort in the knowledge that
they are not the ones on trial, but that it is Swaziland's justice and
political system in the dock.

Tuesday, 25 March 2014

A South African Sunday newspaper was banned from
Swaziland because it published an article that might embarrass King Mswati III.

Swazi Police confiscated from newspaper distributors all copies
of the Sunday Sun tabloid within
Swaziland when it was realised it carried a report about the 18-year-old beauty
contest contestant who the King had chosen to be his 14th wife.

The ban on the paper that is usually widely available in
the kingdom happened on 22 September 2013, but was not widely reported at the
time. It has come to light in a report on human rights in Swaziland recently published
by the US State Department.

The State Department report did not reveal that the article
in question gave details of the private life of Sindiswa Dlamini. The Sunday Sun report said the woman it
nicknamed ‘Naughty
Sindi’ previously had affairs with two of King Mswati’s sons, Prince Majaha and
Prince Bandzile, who are both in their early twenties.

One unnamed source told the newspaper, ‘Sindi has dated both these boys.
She’s a party girl used to having fun.’

Another informant told Sunday
Sun, ‘Sindi is no virgin. She drinks and smokes a lot and has tattoos
on parts of her body I cannot mention.’

One source told the newspaper, ‘She is only doing it [marrying the king]
because she comes from a poor background.’

The media in Swaziland never report about the king without his
permission. King Mswati rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute
monarch.

This was not the first time the media in Swaziland have refused to keep
its readers informed about the Swazi Royal Family. In August 2010, the world’s
media were excited by the case of Swaziland Justice Minister Ndumiso Mamba and
King Mswati’s 12th wife, 22-year-old Inkhosikati
Nothando LaDube. This was after pictures
appeared of Mamba hiding in a bed before his arrest at Royal Villas, a
hotel at Ezulwini just outside Mbabane, where he was said to have had regular
adulterous meetings with LaDube.

The City Press in South Africa
reported at the time that when police pounced, ‘in a desperate effort not to be
found out Mamba cut into the base of the bed and slid in – but police ordered
him out and Mamba, dressed in a brown suit, was soon taken ­into custody’. He
was later forced to resign from the government and the Senate.

At the time the City Press was
also restricted from selling in Swaziland. It was
reported at the time in African media that Swaziland security forces
were instructed to buy all copies of the newspaper
that were on sale in the kingdom.

The Times of
Swaziland, the only independent daily newspaper in the kingdom,
reported at the time that a man was arrested in
Manzini as he tried to get a photocopy of a report in City Press, but
did not tell its readers what the report contained.

The newspaper
did report that a plain clothed police officer had apparently overheard him
requesting that a story contained in the City Press be photocopied. The
man was alleged to be a member of the
Swaziland Youth Congress (SWAYOCO), the
youth wing of the People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO).
Both organisations are banned in Swaziland and both have been branded ‘terrorist
entities’ by the state.

He was taken to a police station and interrogated by officers from the
Criminal Investigations Department (CID). His house was also raided so police
could get the original City Press newspaper.

Monday, 24 March 2014

The Swaziland magazine editor Bheki Makhubu, whose
arrest and jailing has sparked an outcry across the world, appeared in court in
leg irons for a bail application.

Makhubu, editor of the Nation magazine, is charged with contempt of court for writing and
publishing articles critical of the judiciary in Swaziland, where King Mswati
III rules as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch.

Thulani
Maseko, a human rights lawyer, faces similar
charges.

Makhubu appeared in the Swazi High Court for a bail application
clad in leg irons and was surrounded by armed guards. His application was
postponed until 28 March 2014 and he was returned to jail. Maseko is also remanded in
custody but has made no application for bail.

The Swazi
News, an independent newspaper in Swaziland, reported the leg irons were removed from
Makhubu immediately he entered the accused dock and were replaced after the
bail hearing.

Makhubu and Maseko were
arrested and jailed on remand on 18 March 2014.

The arrests of Makhubu and Maseko have been
condemned worldwide by judges, lawyers and groups including, Freedom House,
the Committee to Protect Journalists and the Southern Africa Human
Rights Defenders Network.

Friday, 21 March 2014

More organisations
within Swaziland and internationally have joined the chorus of support for the
two ‘prisoners
of conscience’ who have been jailed on remand accused of contempt of court
for criticising the judiciary in magazine articles.

Human rights lawyer Thulani Maseko and Bheki
Makhubu, editor of the Nation
magazine, were sentenced
to seven days in jail ahead of a court hearing scheduled for 25 March 2014.

They are accused of contempt of court for
criticising judges, including the Swazi Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi,
for the way they handled a court case involving Government Chief Vehicle
Inspector Bhantshana Gwebu.

It was CJ Ramodibedi himself who jailed the two men, described by
Amnesty International as ‘prisoners of conscience’. No hearing was heard in open
court and Maseko and Makhubu were
denied proper legal representation.

The US
Embassy in Swaziland said it had ‘deep concern’ about the arrest of the two
men and added it strongly supported the democratic principles of freedom of speech,
freedom of expression and freedom of the press.

The Law
Society of Swaziland said Makhubu and Maseko were irregularly arrested and
detained on the instruction of the chief justice. It also criticised the
summary manner in which the two were dealt with subsequent to their arrest.

In a statement it said, ‘It is the view of the Law Society that every
citizen of Swaziland is entitled to the due process of the law which entails
the right to legal representation, equality before the law, right to appear in
a open court before an impartial judicial officer, a right to a fair hearing, a
right to administrative justice and a right to personal liberty, including the
right to bail as provided in terms of the provisions enshrined in the
Constitution of Swaziland and the founding principles of natural justice.’

Members of a number of progressive organisations attended court last
week to support the two men, described by Ditshwanelo, The Botswana Centre for Human Rights, as ‘two human rights
defenders’. These included the Swaziland Association of Teachers (SNAT), the
Trade Union Congress of Swaziland (TUCOSWA), the Swaziland Coalition of
Concerned Civic Organisations (SCCCO), the Media Institute of Southern Africa
(MISA), the Coordinating Assembly of Non-Governmental Organisations(CANGO) and Lawyers for Human Rights Swaziland (LHRS).

Meanwhile, the international organisation Reporters Without Borders(RWB) said, ‘The arbitrary arrests of Maseko and Makhubu
are the latest examples of the persecution that awaits anyone voicing the least
criticism of Swaziland’s institutions.’

Lucie Morillon,
head of research and advocacy at RWB, said, ‘In a country where the only voices
tolerated are those of King Mswati and his government, how much leeway do
journalists have to cover and comment on local news developments? None.’

Morillon added, ‘The
detention orders that the chief justice himself issued, without any respect for
Swaziland’s legal standards, are blatant violations of freedom of expression,
motivated by a desire for personal revenge. We call on the authorities to free
these two men at once.’

Freedom
House also called for the immediate release of Makhubu and
Maseko. It said, ‘The Kingdom
of Swaziland must uphold the basic rights and freedoms of its citizens and put
an end to its sustained campaign to suppress its citizens’ basic right to
freedom of expression.’

It added, ‘These
arrests, indictments and imprisonment constitute a direct violation of the
Swaziland constitution’s section 21, which guarantees a fair trial and the
section 24, the right to freedom
of expression.’

The Committee
to Protect Journalists (CPJ)Africa
Program Coordinator Sue Valentine said in a statement, ‘These arrests make a
mockery of Swaziland’s constitution, which is supposed to uphold freedom of
expression.’

Amnesty International has declared both men ‘prisoners of conscience’.

Ditshwanelo, The Botswana
Centre for Human Rights, which is a member of the Southern Africa Human Rights
Defenders Network (SAHRDN), called Makhubu and Maesko, ‘two human rights
defenders’.

Both men have been charged
with contempt of court after articles were published in the Nation magazine accusing the judiciary
in Swaziland of improper conduct in a case involving Bhantshana
Gwebu, the government’s chief motor vehicle inspector, who was arrested after
impounding a vehicle used by another high court judge. After a week in custody,
Gwebu was released on bail. His case is pending in the high court.

CPJ Africa Program Coordinator Sue Valentine said in a statement, ‘These
arrests make a mockery of Swaziland's constitution, which is supposed to uphold
freedom of expression.’

In a statement Ditshwanelo
said, ‘SAHRDN has been monitoring developments in the Kingdom of Swaziland and
is alarmed by the serious deterioration of the human rights situation.
Arbitrary arrests, detention and malicious prosecution of human rights
defenders, including members of the legal profession and journalists continue
unabated.’

Amnesty
International said, ‘We consider Bhekithemba Makhubu and Thulani Maseko
to be prisoners of conscience, arrested and detained merely for exercising
their right to freedom of expression. The Swaziland authorities must release
them immediately and unconditionally.’

In an interview with German
broadcaster Deutsche Welle, Mary Rayner a researcher
on Swaziland at Amnesty International, said the arrests of Makhubu and Maseko
had ‘an intimidating effect’.

She added, ‘There has been various ways in which the journalists'
community and publishing community in Swaziland over a period of years has been
subjected to threats and intimidation and seizure of material and using also
some of the aspects of the draconian terrorism acts to silence the publication
of information and opinion.’

Swaziland’s
new King Mswati III Airport is not fully licensed to operate, despite claims
from the kingdom’s civil aviation authority that it is.

The Regional Director of the International Civil Aviation Organisation
(ICAO), Meshesha Belayneh, has told the Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa
(OSISA) in South Africa that
Swaziland still needs to follow due process before the ICAO can issue a licence
for the new airport.

OSISA published this information nearly two weeks after the airport,
previously known as Sikhuphe, was officially opened by King Mswati on 7 March
2014.

Doubts were first expressed by the global
news agency AFP that the airport was not fully licensed. Following this, Swaziland
Civil Aviation Authority (SWACAA) Director General Solomon Dube was quoted by
the Sunday Observer newspaper in Swaziland, ‘The new airport is fully
licensed.’

Dube told
the newspaper, which is in effect owned by King Mswati, ‘We could not have let the
King open something that is illegal.’

Dube said all the necessary paperwork had been signed and endorsed. He
added that ICAO Regional Director Belayneh was himself present at the official
opening which, ‘meant that everything was in order’.

Dube said the licensing of the facility meant it was ready for use by
the public.

Even after opening the airport, which so far has cost an estimated E3
billion (US$300 million) to build, and was completed at least four years behind
schedule, remains controversial. No commercial planes have flown to the airport
and no airline has formally announced that it intends to use the airport.

In an analysis of
the airport’s future, OSISA said there were still many serious questions
about the sustainability of the airport, ‘including when will it open for
business, how will it lure additional airlines to use its services, how will it
compete with the airports in Johannesburg and Maputo, and will it ever get
close to its full capacity of 360,000 passengers each year - which is more than
five times as many as currently used by the existing airport at Matsapha’.

King Mswati has repeatedly said he wants Swaziland to be a First World
nation by 2022.

OSISA said, ‘While the King's critics find the idea of transforming
Swaziland into a developed state and economic powerhouse within eight years
laughable, especially given the fact that almost two-thirds of the population
still live below the poverty line, Mswati can now point to the (long overdue)
airport as proof that the country is moving in the right direction - regardless
of whether the airport ever attracts the desired traffic or justifies its vast
costs.’

It went on, ‘By finishing its construction, he has proved some of his
detractors wrong since many people believed that it would never be finished.

‘But here are many other criticism and questions to answer - and no sign
that they will be at the moment. For now, the King Mswati III International
Airport - as its name suggests - will continue to be viewed by most Swazis as
the monarch's biggest vanity project rather than (as he clearly believes) his
crowning glory.’

It added the
arrests were, ‘another shocking example of the southern African kingdom’s intolerance
of freedom of expression’.

Amnesty has declared
both men ‘prisoners of conscience’.

Bheki Makhubu, editor of Swaziland’s monthly news magazine The Nation and human rights lawyer Thulani Maseko are being
held at Sidwashini Remand Prison in Mbabane, after ‘highly irregular legal
proceedings’.

Amnesty reported, ‘They were arbitrarily arrested under defective
warrants, denied access to their lawyers and remanded in custody after summary
proceedings held behind closed doors.’

Mary Rayner, researcher on Swaziland at Amnesty International, said in a
statement, ‘These arbitrary arrests and highly irregular legal proceedings
amount to judicial retribution rather than justice being delivered, and are
further evidence of Swaziland’s intolerance of freedom of expression. It
violates international human rights standards and has no basis in Swaziland’s
domestic law.’

She added, ‘We consider Bhekithemba Makhubu and Thulani Maseko to be
prisoners of conscience, arrested and detained merely for exercising their
right to freedom of expression. The Swaziland authorities must release them immediately
and unconditionally.’

The two men are accused of contempt
of court by writing articles published in the Nation in February and March 2014 that criticised the circumstances
surrounding the case of Chief Government Vehicle Inspector, Bhantshana
Gwebu. Gwebu had been arrested and charged with contempt of court after he
arrested a driver of High Court Judge Esther Ota. Gwebu spent nine days at the
Sidwashini Correctional facility before he was released on E15,000 (US$1,500) bail.

Amnesty reported, ‘The warrant used to arrest them, issued by
Swaziland’s Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi, apparently subverted the normal
legal process. The police at Mbabane police station, where the men were
initially detained prior to their appearance before the Chief Justice, also
appear to have been acting under instructions when they denied their lawyers
access.

‘Normal criminal procedure dictates the men should have then appeared
before a magistrate. Instead, they were taken to the Chief Justice’s chambers
for what turned out to be summary proceedings. Their lawyers were not permitted
to make any submissions and the Chief Justice went on to remand them in custody
without the opportunity to apply for bail.

‘It’s clear that the Chief Justice has a prevailing conflict of interest
in this case, and the Swaziland authorities have no grounds on which to hold
these men, other than apparent vindictiveness by a powerful public official.’